You are currently viewing our site as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions, articles and access our other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have, access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

Received a letter response from the letters and emails to our elected officials today. From (the office of) Spencer Bachus, 6th District, Alabama. Long post but I will put the important part in bold.

Quote:

Thank you for expressing your concerns regarding your Second Amendment rights and your thoughts on the continuing gun control discussions. It is certainly important to consider the best ways to prevent violent acts in our society, and having your input is beneficial to me.

Many of the legislative recommendations made by the "Biden Task Force," announced by President Obama on January 16, 2013, will fall under the jurisdiction of the House Committee on the Judiciary, on which I serve. With any response, Congress must respect the Constitution, which we have sworn an oath to support and defend, and the rights of law-abiding Americans. In particular, my support for preserving the rights afforded under the Second Amendment is longstanding and strong. The Second Amendment specifically states that "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed," and I have always supported and defended this constitutional right It is my firm belief that citizens should not be prohibited from protecting themselves, their family, or their property from harm, and that criminals, rather than law-abiding citizens, should be punished for crimes committed. As specific proposals come before the Committee and House for consideration, please know that I will remember your views, and that I welcome your continued involvement and feedback

He rambles on for two more paragraphs about how EOs work so that is the important stuff.

Thank you for contacting me to express your support for H.R. 35, the Safe Schools Act of 2013. I appreciate having the benefit of your views on this important issue.

As you may know, H.R. 35 was introduced by Representative Steve Stockman (R-TX) on January 3, 2013. This legislation would repeal provisions making it unlawful to possess or discharge a firearm in a school zone.

H.R. 35 was referred to the House Judiciary Committee. Please be assured that I will keep your support in mind should this legislation come before the full House of Representatives for a vote. I will also work with my colleagues to address the violence that seems to permeate our culture, ensure that our children and teachers are safe at school, and make certain that those with significant mental challenges are being appropriately identified, diagnosed, and treated so to prevent tragedies, like Sandy Hook, from taking place.

Again, thank you for sharing your views with me. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any additional questions or concerns. I also encourage you to follow me on Facebook, Twitter, and at www.billjohnson.house.gov , so that you may keep track of my most recent work in Congress. I look forward to hearing from you in the future.

Thank you for contacting me to express your views about the President's gun control proposals. It is good to hear from you.

As you know, President Obama recently issued 23 executive actions and endorsed gun control legislative initiatives following the terrible tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary School.

I had hoped President Obama would look to address the root causes of senseless acts of violence and work with Congress to develop a comprehensive plan to lessen the likelihood of these kinds of tragic incidents in the future. Unfortunately, the President has chosen to act unilaterally wherever he can and focus on new gun bans which I believe would undermine the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens.

In response to tragic attacks like the one at Sandy Hook Elementary, I remain committed to ensuring that those who suffer from mental illness, a common thread in these instances, receive proper care, that current gun laws are enforced, and that school safety is enhanced as we address the deeper issue of violence in our society.

Thank you again for taking the time to contact my office. For more information, please visit my website at www.portman.senate.gov . Please keep in touch. EMAIL.BEGINHIDE.MERGE

Thank you for taking the time to contact me concerning gun control, especially in the wake of the horrific tragedy that occurred recently in Newtown, Connecticut. I appreciate you sharing your thoughts in response to this tragic event.

As you know, in the wake of this tragedy, discussion has focused on gun control and restrictions, along with how to provide much needed care to individuals with a mental illness, at both the state and the federal level. The 118th Indiana General Assembly convened on January 7, 2013. While it is likely that there will be bills authored regarding gun control and mental health, there are a broad number of opinions on this issue and I would expect a lot of discussion before any action is taken. One of my top priorities has always been ensuring a safe learning environment for Hoosier students. Along with keeping our students safe, I ensure you that I will protect my constituent's second amendment rights, and will make sure that our right to bear arms is secure. If I have the opportunity to hear debate and vote on these issues, I will consider all solutions.

Again, thank you for contacting me and expressing your stance on this issue. If you have any other legislative issues or concerns please do not hesitate to contact my office.

Sincerely,

Hal Slager
State Representative
House District 15

This response isn't as concrete in support of the 2nd Amendment as I would like, but I take him at his word that he is going to weigh all options. Need to keep a dialog going with him.

*EDIT*

Heres the response I sent to Mr. Slager:

Quote:

Dear Representative Slager,

I thank you for your reply to me about the current legislative environment in regards to the Newtown, CT tragedy. I implore you consider all options in the context of what is best for the Second Amendment rights of Hoosier's and their access to mental health care, not what is politically correct at the moment. I have been reviewing the proposals that this nation's US Congressmen have introduced in Congress and found them to be severely lacking in constitutionality & fairness to both law abiding gun owners and people with mental health issues.

As a law abiding gun owner who enjoys hunting & competitive shooting sports, I would be turned into a criminal as all the firearms that I currently own for hunting (which ARE NOT military style weapons in any way, shape, or form) would be classified as "assault weapons" under all legislation that has currently been introduced into Congress for committee's to consider. I find it offensive that many in Congress and State Legislatures in this country claim to support my Right to Keep and Bear Arms yet they insist that I only be allowed to own certain firearms so as to not pose a threat to others. Each firearm I own I bought because it addressed a specific hunting or shooting sport need, now Congress wants to criminalize my law abiding ownership of hunting & sporting firearms because they have features which they are using to define what an assault weapon should be defined as, not what an assault weapon is defined as.

As a person who has been treated for Attention Deficit, Hyperactive Disorder (ADHD), which according to the National Institute of Health is a "problem with inattentiveness, over-activity, impulsivity, or a combination", I find the current proposals for improving access to mental health care for people as well as supplementing the National Instant Check System (NICS) with mental health care data from mental health care providers to be both lacking and illegal. Due to the stereotypes surrounding people with mental health concerns and the fact that supplementing the NICS with mental health care information from providers is a breach of doctor-patient confidentiality, I ask that the discussion on reforming mental health care be thoroughly researched & studied by legislators, health care providers, and health care insurers before any legislation is contemplated. The last thing that we as Hoosier's and American's need for mental health care is a repeat of the disaster that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act has turned out to be.

Sincerely,

Ole Humpback

IN US Representative Peter Visclosky

Quote:

Dear Ole Humpback:

Thank you for contacting me to express your concerns regarding gun control proposals in response to the recent shooting in Connecticut. I appreciate hearing from you.

I was shocked and heartbroken to learn of the horrific shooting that occurred at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. My thoughts and prayers go out to all of the victims of these attacks and their families for their unfathomable loss. As this marks the seventh mass shooting in the United States in 2012 alone, I firmly believe that Congress must take decisive action to prevent such senseless tragedies from happening again.

While I support the possession of legal firearms by responsible law abiding citizens, I am opposed to the availability of military assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices, which pose serious threats to public safety and the law enforcement officers who risk their lives protecting us.

That is why, in the 103rd Congress, I supported the assault weapons ban, which prohibited the manufacture, transfer, or possession of semi-automatic assault weapons, including those with a large capacity ammunition feeding device. I deeply regret that President Bush allowed this ban to expire in 2004. Also in the 103rd Congress, I supported passage of the Brady Act, currently known as the national instant criminal background check system, which requires background checks for all firearm transfers and purchases. I would note that the Constitutionality of these laws have never been challenged before the Supreme Court.

You may be interested to know that Rep. Carolyn McCarthy has introduced H.R. 138, the Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act, which would reinstate the ban on semi-automatic weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices. Specifically, the measure would prohibit the transfer or possession of a large capacity ammunition feeding device, except for its lawful possession within the United States on or before the date of this Act's enactment, and by law enforcement officers. The measure also would prohibit the importation of such a device, and would require large capacity ammunition feeding devices to be identified by serial numbers.

H.R. 138 was referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary, where it is currently pending consideration. The measure has 64 cosponsors, and a similar measure has been introduced in the Senate by Sen. Feinstein. The Senate measure, S. 150, has 17 cosponsors and was referred to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary.

Most recently, on January 16, 2013, President Obama announced a comprehensive proposal to prevent future tragedies. Specifically, the proposal calls on Congress to enact legislation to require criminal background checks for all gun sales, reinstate the assault weapons ban, restore a ten-round limit on ammunition magazines, eliminate armor-piercing bullets, provide mental health services in schools, and allocate funds to hire more police officers.

Because these recommendations require Congressional approval, the President supplemented this proposal with 23 separate executive actions which will take effect immediately. These actions include providing law enforcement officials and school officials with better training for active shooting situations, establishing incentives to improve information sharing on background checks, directing the Centers for Disease Control to research the causes and prevention of gun violence, and committing to finalizing mental health parity regulations. The President's executive actions seek to strengthen existing laws related to guns, mental health, and safety.

As the nation continues to make sense of the tragedy at Sandy Hook, I hope that our country will have a serious and thoughtful discussion to ensure that we find a proper balance between Americans' right to own guns and the right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

Thank you again for contacting me. Do not hesitate to let me know if you have any other questions or concerns.

Sincerely,

Peter J. Visclosky
Member of Congress

This is as anti 2A as I have received so far. Need to write him and prove with data that this viewpoint is patently wrong.

__________________"Salus populi suprema lex esto" - Latin for "The welfare of the people shall be the supreme law"

The state of Tennessee makes it easy to search for legislation up for consideration concerning firearms. This then makes it easy to send letters to your state officials supporting or opposing specific pieces of legislation up for consideration. I sent 7 this evening.

It would be good if we had this sort of information on each state so everyone would be able to look at and voice their opinion of legislation affecting RKBA.

__________________
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has."
— Margaret Mead
******************Please Read The Forum Rules

TheHighRoad exists to provide a higher grade of discussion than is found on some other gun forums so antis and undecideds can see that gun owners and RKBA advocates are not the reckless misanthropes they tell everyone we are. Personal attacks, group stereotyping, macho chest-thumping, and partisan hackery are low road and hurt all of us.

Received a response from Congressman Ruben Hinojosa, Congressional District 15, Texas:

"It is my belief that a number of President Obama's recent proposals on gun safety are reasonable and common sense safety reforms that are long overdue. I have long supported reinstating the assault weapons ban, and limiting high capacity magazines........Some say that Presidents Obama's proposals are a violation of the second amendment. That is simply false. Like many of our constitutional rights, they are not limitless. Conservative Justice Antonin Scalia put it best in the Supreme Court case District of Coumbia v. Heller opinion, which upheld our constitutional right to bear arms: "Like most rights, the Second Amendment is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose:......"

Received this today, he is a very strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment.

"Dear Neighbor,

The nation continues to grieve with the community of Newtown, Connecticut over the attack that stole the lives of dozens of innocent children and teachers. What happened was unconscionable evil that most of us will never understand. Since then, some elites in Washington have used the Newtown tragedy for political leverage to reignite the gun control debate.

Since the beginning of the year, we have seen a number of extreme proposals from the Senate and 23 executive edicts from the President. Not one of these proposals would have changed the outcome of the tragedy in Newtown. What they will do is redline the Constitution and bruise our right to bear arms which is guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment.

Make no mistake--these proposals advocate for more government control not more gun control. I believe in the sanctity of the Constitution. The Bills Of Rights were designed to protect citizens from an oppressive government. This timeless document has guaranteed freedom for Americans for over 200 years; it is certainly not up for negotiation now.

Those who believe that more gun control will end violence should examine the evidence. Mexico, for example, has outlawed guns completely, but there has not been a decline in gun-related deaths. Chicago and Washington, DC have some of the toughest gun laws in America, but they are also two of the most dangerous cities in America. So, what now? The focus of any discussion or action should not be on the gun, but on the shooter. In my previous life as a judge and prosecutor in the Harris County courtrooms, I never saw a gun tried for a crime. That’s because we hold the shooter accountable, not an inanimate object.

And, yet here in Congress, we have legislators advocating for more restrictions on guns while they have the protection of armed guards at every door in the Capitol – hypocrisy at its highest.

I am a staunch supporter of the Second Amendment, and I will continue to defend our constitutional right. More laws amount to more control - not more effectiveness. And more laws mean less liberty. And that’s just the way it is.

God and Texas,

Ted Poe
Member of Congress
2nd District of Texas"

__________________
Lifetime member of NRA, GOA, and SAF

"Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy." ~ Benjamin Franklin

I received the form letter response from Levin that I'm sure has been posted already, if I don't find it I will post it up later. The more I thought about it the more it irked me so I decided to respond to him, copying the other Senator and my Representative (who actually gets it). I probably went too far but he needs to be called out for his not upholding his oath to defend the constitution.

This is the reply that I recieved from Minnesota State Senator Bill Weber.
(He grew up less than a mile from me, and his older brother hunted together when we were kids.)

Ed,

First of all, thank you for your service to our great country!

I share your concerns on 2nd Amendment rights. I think it is possible that the federal government will overreach, and I have no doubt that the President will use executive order if he thinks he can get away with it. On the other hand, they will fail to evaluate the trash we see in movies, on TV and in video games claiming protection under 1st Amendment rights.

At the state level, we have a governor who is not on our side of this issue. I believe the Republican Caucus will need to reach out to the rural DFL members to hopefully prevent any state assault on gun rights. If we can achieve a status quo on this issue with the current political structure, it will be a victory within itself.

Thank you for taking the time to contact me. We will keep an eye on this issue and if we need to activate you as concerned citizens, we will alert you to those needs.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts on guns. I appreciate having the benefit of your comments on this important and timely issue.

As the former chief prosecutor of Minnesota's largest county, I worked to enforce the gun laws already on the books and have long supported efforts to promote gun safety, including background checks. I also believe the Second Amendment gives American citizens the right to own guns for collection, protection, and sport. This right is an important part of our shared history and heritage, and should be protected.

As a member of the Judiciary Committee, I look forward to hearings on the President's recommendations and proposed public safety solutions that include school safety, addressing mental illness, limits on high-capacity magazines and assault weapons, and other efforts to combat violence.

Again, thank you for taking the time to contact me. One of the most important parts of my job is listening to what the people of Minnesota have to say to me. I am here in our nation's capital to do the public's business and to serve the people of our state. I hope you will contact me again about matters of concern to you.

Thank you for contacting me regarding Second Amendment rights. I appreciate that you took the time to write on this important topic.
Responsible gun ownership is an integral part of our Western heritage. The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides for an individual right, and I am dedicated to protecting the rights of citizens to own firearms for personal protection, hunting, collecting or for other legal purposes.
We can all agree that the shootings at Columbine High School; Virginia Tech; in Aurora; Tucson, AZ; Newtown, CT and other instances in which terrible crimes have been committed with guns are national tragedies that should concern us all. No single policy is going to be adequate in preventing gun tragedies in the future. We need comprehensive solutions that examine our culture's glorification of violence, the effectiveness of our laws, our ability to enforce those laws and access to firearms, especially those designed for the battlefield. We must do everything we can - consistent with the Second Amendment - to keep weapons out of the hands of criminals, the mentally ill and those who would turn them against their community. As legislation related to Second Amendment rights is debated, I will carefully examine its intentions and impacts and use your thoughts to help guide me.
I will continue to listen closely to what you and other Coloradans have to say about matters before Congress, the concerns of our communities, and the issues facing Colorado and the nation. My job is not merely about supporting or opposing legislation, but also about bridging the divide that has paralyzed our nation's politics. For more information about my positions and to learn how my office can assist you, please visit my website at www.markudall.senate.gov.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts regarding firearms issues. I appreciate hearing about your interest in the issues facing our country and state, and I am glad for the opportunity to respond to your inquiry.

The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution establishes the right to bear arms, which more commonly means owning or possessing a firearm. Our Founding Fathers recognized this right when they included it as one of the original 10 Amendments, or Bill of Rights, to the Constitution. The ability to purchase and own firearms can be traced to the founding and defense of our nation, and I believe in the continued importance of the Second Amendment today. I feel strongly that the vast majority of gun owners in Utah and across the country understand the serious responsibilities associated with gun ownership, and they possess and use firearms legally.

Across our country, we have all been shocked and saddened by recent tragedies involving gun violence perpetrated by disturbed individuals. As a result there has been a great deal of discussion in the public policy world about possible steps to prevent tragic acts of violence. I believe responsible individuals have a constitutional right to own firearms, and that this right should not be limited. However, even the staunchest defenders of Second Amendment rights are deeply troubled by acts of senseless and brutal violence. It is here that we need to start, as a country, a broad discussion about how to reduce acts of violence in our society. Each of us should have the expectation of safety in our daily lives.

There are three general topics that should be considered in this discussion. First, we should examine our existing gun laws to determine their effectiveness as they are currently being enforced. Second, we should address the current mental health system in our country and evaluate options to make improvements. Third, we should examine the culture of violence in today’s society and seek out ideas to counteract that culture.

As we attempt to find common ground on efforts to reduce violence in our country, we should keep in mind the importance of seeking pragmatic, bipartisan solutions. Any meaningful proposals should be based on facts and with data demonstrating how they will reduce incidents of violence. For example, the so-called Assault Weapons Ban was in place for ten years before it expired in 2004, and the consensus of dozens of studies of that law demonstrate that the law had no real effect on reducing acts of gun violence in our country. The discussion should be deliberative and not reactionary, broad based and not simplistic, and formed through consensus of a wide range of interests and not from a small group of people.

Again, thank you for sharing your concerns with me. If you have any additional questions, please feel free to contact my office.

Honest response. I didn't expect this. I wonder when I will get my response from him. It's a little encouraging that my representative, despite his party affiliation, is not just spewing the same anti drivel: "I respect the second amendment BUT....".

"Each of us should have the expectation of safety in our daily lives."
This is the only statement that seems ignorant to me. Safety is an illusion.
If his votes match his stated position, I may have to vote for him next time.

__________________
<Sent from my tactical full metal jacket assault phone>
The samurai's entire being was embodied in his sword.

Thank you for contacting me to share your views on proposals to reduce gun violence. I appreciate hearing from you.

No one can deny that gun violence is a serious problem in this country today. We owe it to the victims of the growing number of mass shootings to vigorously debate specific and comprehensive proposals that can keep our communities safer. The right approach focuses on many issues - improvements to the mental health system, better security protocols and common sense rules about gun use, including keeping firearms out of the hands of dangerous individuals.

When I was on the Richmond City Council in the 1990s, our city was mired in an epidemic of gun violence that included the city having the second-highest homicide rate in the United States. The most successful step we took was implementing Project Exile, a program that involved federal prosecution and tougher penalties for gun crimes that were previously treated more leniently in state courts. Celebrated by diverse groups engaged in the gun violence debate - including the National Rifle Association and the Brady Campaign - the program helped drive down Richmond's homicide rate by nearly 60 percent within a few years.

In 2007, the tragic shooting at Virginia Tech revealed glaring weaknesses in campus security protocols at colleges and universities, in our mental health system and the gun background check system for gun purchases. In a bipartisan spirit, I worked with then-Attorney General Bob McDonnell to immediately improve our background check system and issued an executive order ensuring that those adjudicated to be mentally ill and dangerous would be entered into a national database and barred from purchasing weapons. We also changed standards for mental health treatment and increased funding for community health programs while dramatically improving campus security and efforts to assist college students suffering from mental stress.

In January I attended a round-table event in Richmond with Vice President Biden on gun violence, to talk about the lessons learned in Virginia and the need for a comprehensive approach to these problems. As your U.S. Senator, I will work to bring that kind of comprehensive approach that will strengthen the safety of our communities, while protecting our Second Amendment rights. As a gun owner who worked with others to constitutionally guarantee Virginians the right to hunt, I know that you can be a strong supporter of the Second Amendment without tolerating the gun tragedies that are too often a part of our daily lives.

Concerning specific proposals, I am a strong supporter of universal background record checks. This is the only way we can enforce existing laws that prohibit dangerous individuals from purchasing guns. I am open to supporting legislation placing reasonable limits on high capacity magazines, combat-style weapons and gun trafficking if they are carefully drafted.

Please be assured that I will keep your views in mind as Congress continues to debate strategies to reduce gun violence. Thank you once again for contacting me.

I've been sending all kinds of emails, like the rest of you.
here is Paul Gosar's response to my email asking him to oppose any new firearm legislation, as well as a promise to do my best to have someone else fill his seat if he does.

Dear Mr. Heslin,

Thank you for contacting me about the tragic events that occurred at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Connecticut. This tragedy affected so many, and I am always glad to hear your thoughts, concerns, and opinions on the matter.

First, my thoughts and prayers are with all of those affected by the tragic shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. My deepest sympathies are with the families and loved ones of the staff and students who were killed or injured and those who witnessed this horrific event. We mourn the loss of the school children and adults whose lives were claimed by the heartbreaking acts on December 14, 2012.

We must now pause and reflect as to how we can prevent a repeat of the events in Newtown, Connecticut while preserving our liberties and values, including the right to bear arms. Our Constitution recognizes certain core liberties that we are endowed with by God—not by the Federal government. The right to defend oneself and one's family and property are among these. The founders of this country knew that having capable citizens willing to take up arms to defend the Republic was essential. For that reason, each individual was given the right to own, possess and responsibly use firearms.

In an effort to prevent other instances like the events in Newtown, we must also engage in a broader discussion that includes increased access to mental health care services. This should include educating the public about the warning signs of those who would harm themselves and others and addressing the stigma related to diagnosis and treatment. Most individuals with severe and persistent mental illness will not commit violent crimes but we need a system in place to recognize and intervene when a risk is posed.

It is crucial that we enforce existing gun laws already on the books. It is my hope that this tragedy results in solutions designed to prevent other similar occurrences.

Irresponsible and criminal use of arms cannot be tolerated, but I believe that using new gun control laws to address this case and others like it would be unwise and ineffective. The federal government must not sink to the lowest common denominator to punish responsible citizens and to infringe on Constitutional rights. I find it distasteful that some people seek to capitalize on a tragedy in order to trample on our Constitution for political gain.

Please know that as your Congressman, I fully support Second Amendment rights and the right to own and carry firearms in a responsible manner. I will oppose any unconstitutional efforts by the federal government to infringe upon Second Amendment rights. I have been a life-long supporter of responsible gun ownership. I have also been a hunter for most of my life, and I am well aware of our rights and duties relative to firearms. We must remain vigilant and enforce all of our constitutional rights, not simply pick and choose the ones we like. Our constitutional rights are not dependent upon which president, or which Congress, is in office.

Again, I appreciate your thoughts and concerns. It is a pleasure to serve Arizona as part of its Congressional Delegation. Your suggestions are always welcome, and if ever I may be of assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Thank you for contacting me to share your thoughts on firearms and the Second Amendment. I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue.

The tragedy in Newtown, Connecticut was unspeakable, incomprehensible and unimaginable evil. There are no words that can offer enough comfort and solace to a grieving community. Since that tragedy, there have been calls for immediate action ranging from legislation for more and less gun control and a national discussion on mental health.

I am an ardent supporter of the individual right to keep and bear arms protected under the Second Amendment. As a former prosecutor and judge, I have tried many shooters in criminal cases, but never a gun. Some may misplace blame on videogames, Hollywood, or the media, but the blame should always be on the shooter. Nations, like Mexico, that have outlawed guns completely have not seen a decline in gun-related deaths. Additionally, Fox News reported that Chicago has some of the toughest gun laws in America, but leads the nation in gun violence.

On January 16, 2013, the Administration issued 23 actions that they plan to take to address gun violence. Ranging from strengthening background checks to launching a national responsible gun ownership campaign, all actions are targeted to facilitate gun control. I do not believe executive orders are the way to control gun violence. The focus of any discussion or action must be on the individual, and I look forward to having that discussion with my colleagues in Congress.

Thank you again for contacting me with your thoughts. For additional information regarding current legislation and my representation of the 2nd District, please refer to my website: poe.house.gov. While you are visiting the website, be sure to sign up for my electronic newsletter.

God and Texas,

TED POE

__________________God and Texas!NRA Benefactor Life Member
TSRA Life Member
GOA Life Member

I wrote both my senators after the Newtown shooting, expressing my hope that they would focus their efforts on stopping these deranged individuals, rather than on weapons, and urging them not to squander this opportunity to address the mental health system and involuntary commitment of certain individuals, and instead jump on the easy and very public bandwagon of gun control.

Alas, Sen. Mark Warner chose to ignore that plea, and do just that. He has expressed support for Diane Feinstein's ASW ban (never mind that the last one had no effect whatever on crime, nor did it prevent mass shootings like Columbine). And in an interview recently, he said:

Quote:

Well, Gwen, I'm a strong Second Amendment rights supporter. I own firearms. On my farm, I have actually got shooting range.

But Friday afternoon, my daughters, who had all come home from college, said, dad, you know, how did this happen? And what are you going to do about it?

And just as a father, the horror of what happened in Connecticut coming on the heels of tragedies at Virginia Tech years before, the tragedy in Colorado, and it seems like about every six or nine months, one of these incidents happening in America, makes me say, you know, enough is enough. There's got to be a rational way to sort through this...

I think that, from the evidence I have seen, that a lot of the challenge comes around the speed by which you can shoot, in effect, these multiple magazines in terms of how rapidly they can be discharged.

Now, there's a whole series of different negotiations about what qualifies as an assault weapon and what doesn't. I think there will be time for that kind of conversation.

We have got to find a way to sort through to where there is an ability for law-abiding citizens still to possess firearms -- nobody is going to take away your shotgun -- but to make sure that these kinds of weapons that in many cases were developed for our military and have become extraordinarily, lethally effective killing machines for our military are now in the hands of people that are just not appropriate...

What are the instruments here that are being used? Are there guns that were developed by the military as technology has advanced and has allowed our soldiers to become better, more effective in Iraq and Afghanistan? Should all of those weapons be able to be slightly modified and then sold on a commercial market?

What kind of -- how much restraint does it put on a lawful target shooter if they want to have to change out a clip after every 10 shells or -- 10 or 15 shells? I'm not sure what the right number should be here...

But I do think that simply saying that the status quo is acceptable and bemoaning another tragedy six or nine months from now, without any real close examination of seeing what laws and rules and regulations need to be changed, would be a real mistake and wouldn't do -- wouldn't be the appropriate honoring the legacy of those poor kids that lives were taken.

I have written back to his office since reading this, and informed him that I will never vote for him again, and that I will now spend time and money to make certain he loses his seat come the next election, and if he ever runs for public office again, I'll do it all over again.

Just as I couldn't support John McCain, after McCain-Feingold unconstitutionally restricted free speech, I can no longer support him. I cannot and will not support ANY politician who supports blatantly unconstitutional legislation, undermining my rights and liberties.

Maybe if he gets enough letters making it clear he's committing political suicide, supporting Feinstein's ASW ban in a state like Virginia, he'll rethink his support for that bill. I'm not holding my breath, but if you live in Virginia, write to him and let him know he's playing with fire on this one.

Well, I tend to vote republican more than democrat. But Warner was one of the few seemingly genuine moderate, centrist democrats I could support. No more. As I said, I don't want to be a single issue voter, but when a politician crosses the line into supporting blatantly unconstitutional laws, then he's crossed a line that makes it impossible for me to support him.

Senator Jeff Seesions of Alabama is strongly in the pro-gun,pro-second Amendment category.

__________________
Pet peeves;"If you don't carry your gun like I do you're irresponsible","if you don't use the lube,cleaner and preservative that I do...you don't know guns","if you don't agree with my favorite gun scribe/guru,you are obviously uninformed".....just to name a few.

This site, its contents, Shooting Reviews, and its contents are Copyright (c) 2010-2013 Firearms Forum, Inc.

IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER

Although The High Road has attempted to provide accurate information on the forum, The High Road assumes no responsibility for the accuracy of the information. All information is provided "as is" with all faults without warranty of any kind, either express or implied. Neither The High Road nor any of its directors, members, managers, employees, agents, vendors, or suppliers will be liable for any direct, indirect, general, bodily injury, compensatory, special, punitive, consequential, or incidental damages including, without limitation, lost profits or revenues, costs of replacement goods, loss or damage to data arising out of the use or inability to use this forum or any services associated with this forum, or damages from the use of or reliance on the information present on this forum, even if you have been advised of the possibility of such damages.